http://agiantleap.tigblog.org/ What's on the minds of young leaders from around the globe? en-us http://agiantleap.tigblog.org/post/39490
It seems as if the youth in our community gravitate more towards the criminal than the scholar, they seem to find it more fulfilling to degrade a woman in order to look cool amongst their friends than to give the proper respect due to another human being, the same that they would want given to their mother, sister or daughter. Why is that? And why does it seem that everyone wants to be a thug these days?

I want to discuss the thug mentality in three parts: What is a thug? Where did the popularization of the thug come from and what is the usefulness of the thug mentality?


Growing up I saw thugs as people that were looked down upon. They didn’t care about the welfare of anyone but themselves and their momentary needs. If a thug saw something he or she wanted they’d simply take it, by intimidation, violence or any other means of persuasion (this could be applied to other things besides a certain kind of person but for this discussion my focus is on the person). Usually they were the dudes on the corner in the neighborhood or somewhere in the streets grouped together hustling or just being. So I was told to stay away from that element because they were bad news, with no long term tangible goals, no insurance benefits and could look forward to living most of there lives in a cell, even though growing up poor and in the projects, that was usually all that was around me. But I noticed that thugs looked out for their family and loved ones as much as possible and had a kind of code that they lived by that whatever they did they had to do in order to survive and whoever it hurt in the process probably had it coming to them anyway. Most thugs I knew didn’t have stable home environments or anyone that cared for their well being, their families were usually hustlers or simply struggling single mothers or grandparents trying to survive like mine were. Their guardians, if any, showed love by providing food, clothes and shelter for them and didn’t need any problems.

Where did the popularity of the thug mentality come from in today’s society?

I don’t want to place all the blame or praise on one person but I look at someone whose persona was so strong that he couldn’t be denied, but one whose message far surpassed the basics of the thug mentality: Tupac Amaru Shakur. Tupac lived the thug creed to a science, he made it where the “have-nots” had a face, a voice and a spirit that was felt around the world. He came from a life of poverty and long standing struggle, so he had a full understanding of ghetto life and its pitfalls. But the beauty of Tupac’s being was that he embraced all the negative attributes that society placed upon him and applied his intelligence, creativity and passion into making the “thug life” popular and positive, in the sense of using “thuggism” as a movement in mobilizing the “have-nots” into a positive force in unifying and changing the plight of youths in ghettos around the world. As well as exposing the hypocrisy of a system that was designed to keep those outside of the status quo in a permanent state of poverty.

What is the usefulness of the thug mentality in today’s society?
To me, with the death of Tupac Shakur it seemed that a lot of people forgot the point of his message and focused on the negativity surrounding most of his life and untimely death. We always seem to see the people who profess their thug creditability in style of dress and attitude only but not in principle or practice. The goal of the true thug was to elevate himself from the ghetto and live comfortably within an unbiased society without having to succumb to the evils that go along with having to thug in order to survive. And deeper still, to live and be recognized as a human being, contributing your god given talent, whatever it may be in elevating and molding a society that gives equal opportunity to everyone. The thug life mentality to me was meant to be more of a vehicle in advancement and promoting pride in one’s self, embracing who you are, no matter your financial situation, or background and educating yourself to be a better person rather than being the recipatant of a street level badge of honor. This mentality has to become more than just a derogatory, buffoonery like symbol that we see in videos and on the streets that have come to define young people and more of a movement, joining in a long line of survival tactics used by some of our greatest leaders from George Washington (the father of our county) to Africa Bambatta (the mighty Zulu nation).

Too many of our young people are victims of violent crimes, rape, and murder and have no clue of the value of their own life. We all have choices and must strive to look deeper to uncover the truths in any situation. This mentality is useful when applied in positive principle to bring about a positive change within yourself and your community if applied with the right spirit. But don’t try to be something or someone that you know that you’re not. You are beautiful in your own way. Remember when faced with a choice it’s always better to do the right thing than the wrong thing.

God Bless
]]> Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:16:00 EDT http://agiantleap.tigblog.org/post/39490 33.5205556 -86.802500033.5205556-86.8025000 http://agiantleap.tigblog.org/post/39408
Davey D’s Hip Hop Political Palace
An Open Letter to Hip Hop About Some Real Important Shyt

Here's what's happening folks. The house has gone passed the COPE bill and rejected proposals to insure Net Neutrality. Those who sided with the Comcast and Verizon are well aware that the ability of ordinary people to communicate to the masses is a problem because it’s been the only thing holding them accountable. For the last 5 years, the biggest stories about government corruption, corporate swindles, global warming and no weapons of Mass Destruction has come through Internet bloggers who were able to push an issue to the masses and force Fox, CNN and other News outlets to pay some sort of attention.…..Anyone who is an activist and championed causes ranging from Election fraud and Diebold Machines, police brutality Freeing Mumia, Global warming, Media Reform and Saving the South Central Farm in LA just to name a few this is will especially hit you hard, because the Internet and its ‘neutrality’ provisions have enabled many of us to counter biased mainstream media outlets get information out about particular causes all over the world.

Yesterday that ability took one step closer to coming to an end. The mantra being sung on Capitol Hill is ‘Shut it down’, ‘Shut that shyt down and redirect traffic to a handful of places and media outlets that they can influence and control’.

House Rejects Net Neutrality

The First Amendment of the Internet – the governing principle of net neutrality, which prevents telecommunications corporations from rigging the web so it is easier to visit sites that pay for preferential treatment – took a blow from the House of Representatives Thursday.

Bowing to an intense lobbying campaign that spent tens of millions of dollars – and held out the promise of hefty campaign contributions for those members who did the bidding of interested firms – the House voted 321 to 101 for the disingenuously-named Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (COPE). That bill, which does not include meaningful network-neutrality protections creates an opening that powerful telephone and cable companies hope to exploit by expanding their reach while doing away with requirements that they maintain a level playing field for access to Internet sites.

"Special interest advocates from telephone and cable companies have flooded the Congress with misinformation delivered by an army of lobbyists to undermine decades-long federal practice of prohibiting network owners from discriminating against competitors to shut out competition. Unless the Senate steps in, (Thursday's) vote marks the beginning of the end of the Internet as an engine of new competition, entrepreneurship and innovation." says Jeannine Kenney, a senior policy analyst for Consumers Union.
In case there was any question that Kenney's assessment was accurate, the House voted 269-152 against an amendment, offered by Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey, which would have codified net neutrality regulations into federal law. The Markey amendment would have prevented broadband providers from rigging their services to create two-tier access to the Internet – with an "information superhighway" for sites that pay fees for preferential treatment and a dirt road for sites that cannot pay the toll.

After explicitly rejecting the Markey amendment's language, which would have barred telephone and cable companies from taking steps "to block, impair, degrade, discriminate against, or interfere with the ability of any person to use a broadband connection to access…services over the Internet," the House quickly took up the COPE legislation.

The bill drew overwhelming support from Republican members of the House, with the GOP caucus voting 215-8 in favor of it. But Democrats also favored the proposal, albeit by a narrower vote of 106 to 92. The House's sole independent member, Vermont's Bernie Sanders, a champion of internet freedom who is seeking his state's open Senate seat this fall, voted against the measure.

Joining Sanders in voting against the legislation were most members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, including its co-chairs, California Representatives Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, as well as genuine conservatives who have joined the fight to defend free speech and open discourse on the internet, including House Judiciary Committee chair James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, and Intelligence Committee chair Pete Hoekstra, R-Michigan.

The left-meets-right voting in the House reflected the coalition that has formed to defend net neutrality, which includes such unlikely political bedfellows as the Christian Coalition of America, MoveOn.org, National Religious Broadcasters, the Service Employees International Union, the American Library Association, the American Association of Retired People, the American Civil Liberties Union and all of the nation's major consumer groups.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, opposed COPE, while House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, were enthusiastically supported it.

Among the Democrats who followed the lead of Hastert and Boehner – as opposed to that of Pelosi – were House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer and Maryland Representative Ben Cardin, who is running for that state's open Senate seat in a September Democratic-primary contest with former NAACP President Kweisi Mfume. Illinois Democrat Melissa Bean, who frequently splits with her party on issues of interest to corporate donors, voted with the Republican leadership, as did corporate-friendly "New Democrats" such as Alabama's Artur Davis, Washington's Adam Smith and Wisconsin's Ron Kind – all co-chairs of the Democratic Leadership Council-tied House New Democrat Coalition.

The fight over net neutrality now moves to the Senate, where Maine Republican Olympia Snowe and North Dakota Democrat Byron Dorgan have introduced legislation to codify the net neutrality principles of equal and unfettered access to Internet content into federal law. Mark Cooper, the director of research for the Consumers Federation of America, thinks net neutrality will find more friends in the Senate, at least in part because the "Save the Internet" coalition that has grown to include more than 700 groups, 5,000 bloggers and 800,000 individuals is rapidly expanding.

"This coalition will continue to grow, millions of Americans will add their voices, and Congress will not escape the roar of public opinion until Congress passes enforceable net neutrality," says Cooper.

Cooper's correct to be more hopeful about the Senate than the House. But the House vote points up the need to get Democrats united on this issue. There's little question that a united Democratic caucus could combine with principled Republicans in the Senate to defend net neutrality. But if so-called "New Democrats" in the Senate side with the telephone and cable lobbies, the information superhighway will become a toll road.
Edited by: mrdaveyd at: 6/9/06 8:21 am

*To check out the entire article go to www.daveyd.com
]]> Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:07:00 EDT http://agiantleap.tigblog.org/post/39408 33.5205556 -86.802500033.5205556-86.8025000